Allowed

Union Bank of India v. M/S N Lakshmi Narayana and Co.

DRT20 Jan 2025TA/7/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Debts Recovery Tribunal allowed a transfer application filed by Union Bank of India. The defendants were absent. The court declared the defendants jointly and severally liable to pay the recovery claim along with future interest and costs, validating the bank's mortgage claim.

What did the court decide?

Defendants directed to pay Rs. 36,94,862/- with future interest and costs; TA claim secured by mortgage; Recovery Certificate issued.

Union Bank of India versus M/S N Lakshmi Narayana… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | DRT (2025)

¶1

IN^{THE DEBTSRECOVERYTRIBUNAL-IIAT HYDEMBAD} DATED^{THIS THE 2oth DAY OF ]ANUARY'2025} PRESENT:^{sH. RAMESHWAR,XRI|S|P;3:1"L LB' (Hons')' M'A'}

¶2

TRANSFER^{APPLICATiON NO: 07 OF 2023}

¶3

tlnion Bank^{of India ,} noad t'lo.r,^{Banjara Hills Branch'} Relia nce Classic^Enclave, eaniara^{xirrs, Hyderabad- 500034'} nep. uy^{its Authorized Officer'}

¶4

.....Applicant.

¶5

Versus

¶6

lvl/s. N. Lakshmi Narayana^{& Co.,} A Partnership Firm Having its Office at H.No.8-3-199/F, Opp Saibaba Temple, Vengalrao Nagar, S.R Nagar, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500038. Rep by its Partner Nukarapu Lakshmi Narayana.

¶7

Mr.Nukarapu Lakshmi Narayana, S/o. Rama Swamy, Aged about 68 Years, Occ: Business, R/o. H. No.8-3- 199/F, Opp Saibaba Temple, Vengalrao Nagar, S.R Nagar, Hyderabad, Tela ngana - 500038.

¶8

M rs. Prameela N ukarapu, Wo.Nukarapu^Lakshmi Naraya na, Major, Occ: Business, H. No.8-3- 199/F, Opp Saibaba Temple, Vengalrao Nagar, S.R Nagar, Hyderabad, Telangana - 500038.

¶9

Mr. N.Tharaka Ravl Kumar, S/o. Nukarapu Lakshmi Narayana, Maior, Occ: Business. //N>'/'r.

¶10

u'Lq

¶11

7 A.NO.O7 /2021

¶12

¶13

o' "' ["]l;1^{;3;',33j ],"j ['-1 Bl l"} ]:'" ;,il#ffi,^{i6lunsunu - sooo38'}

¶14

'^{xl"l;li:?5i,'[1$xli"il'u'unu'} Y'l*;T'ifr);:'3;i^{sai baba remPre'} h;.:::;.",1+:g;n';lJj1il4o"

¶15

...Defendants

¶16

Counsel^{for the APPlicant} : M/s'V'Sethu^{Madhava Rao}

: Ex-Parte

Defendants

::^{ORDER ::}

r"'| 1^{rhe App can,} :itliI:J:"ffT,"i I*:1;;$""'"f sum^{of Rs'36'94't} Hr:fi*#{^#$*';= with^{costs and in oeto"'' '-} -^{,.116,were set ex-parte on}

¶21

2 :11TI1;i *rx :[ru[ru::x';Ir:: served^{on DI} called^{absent and no representation'}

¶22

r " ": J:Ii1:^x

¶23

3'tr i:11"J;tt":"1:^:ZHr^- A.12.

¶24

TA.NO.07l2023

¶25

Ld. Counsel for the Applicant Bank reported orders may be passed through merits. perused the material placed on record.

¶26

The point that arises for consideration is:-

¶27

Whether the Applicant Bank is enti ed for the claim made in the TA against the Defendants and TA schedute properties?

¶28

As stated supra, the Defendants remained ex-parte. The Evidence Affidavit coupled with the recitals in the documents viz./ Exs.A.1 to A.12 marked on behalf of the Applicant Bank clinches the claim of the Applicant Bank against the Defendants. Hence, I hold that the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the TA claim to the Applicant Bank with future jnterest and costs.

¶29

In the result, the present Transfer Application No.O712023 is allowed as under: -

¶30

i) The Defendants are joinuy and severally liable to pay to the Applicant Bank a sum of Rs.36,94,862/- i.e., a sum of Rs.Z9,4O,34Z/under SOD A/c. No.110531100000487 and a sum of Rs.7,54,520/- under FITL A/c.No. 110530100045240 with future interest @13.100/o p.a. simple from the date of application till the date of realization;

¶31

ii) the TA claim is secured by way of mortgage of properties described in the schedule 0w"

¶32

TA.NO.07/2023

¶33

¶34

annexed^{to the TA and the applicant bank is} entitled to^{proceedagainst the same to} realise^{its debu}

¶35

iii) the applicant^{bank is also entitled to proceed} against the^{person and properties of} defendants^{for realization of its dues;}

¶36

iv) the applicant^{bank is entitledfor the costs'}

¶37

Memo^{within 2 weeks}

¶38

1. The Applicant^{Bank is directed to file Cost} from the^{date of receipt of this order'}

¶39

9, Issue^{RecoveryCertificate accordingly'} '

¶40

1. Communicate io,"i...'"iJ1o';;'il.;lJrlecteo'^{a copy of this sieneo order ana pronounced bv me in the open court to the parties concernedon} ihis the 2o'h^{DaYof January, 2025)'}

¶41

Kos"
PRESIDING OFFICER

Union Bank of India v. M/S N Lakshmi Narayana and Co.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union Bank of India v. M/S N Lakshmi Narayana and Co.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bank of Baroda versus M/S Sri Jagadeeswara Cotton Silk Twisting and Dying Unit

State Bank of India versus Ridhi Eye Care Centre

Yes Bank Limited versus Kalvacharla Narender